Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:122342
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAK=iT=UrMCPw5ydCnxa_87ws6xKRO5Y3qJnmchczgDds8u660A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABigaAUjSx3-vEaQhPk-toJTSg+J3CLrO3otpm1g6hqbYyQKvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK=iT=WgsEZjyu3Y2wTWvycqCsYH7MrLsZgERZK3u75U08ePpA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL0xaBHfEMs1BVAMZOuFCUpb9orNSRD0YDhu=3wJAGK7K0_=dg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK=iT=XDVcs+y4XDmGu2re137i2yD9LiEj1-HLvyxxxrb8jFUw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK=iT=UDUjCZ-25k_MkHFO7uKdWAqoJxdWLVBGM2_SYDk-JyAg@mail.gmail.com>
 <742f202d-7990-4f51-b903-7a15e3fd33c2@app.fastmail.com> <CABigaAW2KeGxf7HnzpcOeS=CL31=UNGZnqpZvoJsJg4miBTBGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1cd8fa7b-ab62-4563-bf13-bb7801f1ce8d@app.fastmail.com> <CAK=iT=X5XKdSZ1D=+SEU4=12hJK+oPn+XBWxA54yyQsxAixx8A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOyH9yT5NQQYgq=5O5q==BaTpm-JJRDUcAsX2Tc36hbXLdH5vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK=iT=W7xzS_9FZj-Cd1uUBaLtX=157t81_KOkr999bRyTcDjw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOyH9yQKA+RnhXFHvH=dVHT8UWfyF_A89p_c9wES1k4kKstBtA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOyH9yQKA+RnhXFHvH=dVHT8UWfyF_A89p_c9wES1k4kKstBtA@mail.gmail.com>
	=?UTF-8?B?Yg==?= <6562680@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2024 12:25:15 +0300
Message-ID: <CAK=iT=VtOx=dZYNMNnn0iVPm4KUy1BoCr07=WYJFR9HJOOKLPg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alexander Pravdin <alex.pravdin@interi.co>, internals@lists.php.net
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d1ae770610db6598"
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Feature request: https://github.com/php/php-src/issues/13301
From: 6562680@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?0JPRgNC40LPQvtGA0LjQuSBTZW5pb3IgUEhQIC8g0KDQsNC30YDQsNCx0L7RgtGH0LjQuiBXZQ==?==?UTF-8?B?Yg==?=)

--000000000000d1ae770610db6598
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Ok, I understand your position. Want explanations about personal behavior -
please write by telegram.

PHPStan is out the case.

SOLID is not a marker of good architecture, it's a marker of idealistic
understanding, for me.

I already long ago passed that time where I can just say "this code is bad,
I am leaving". New rules of business, and then, payments - there's no bad
code, there's bad coders. And also "bad coders have to be replaced with AI"
(especially once we understand that AI helps only if you already know the
answer, they don't solve anything, but use any hype to hit employees).

So language should decide - help developers or help businesses. The top of
any business = do nothing. That's why business is on the wrong side related
to science.

Future of any language is predicted not with code beauty, but with payments
in the business. Am sure, you're noticed that hard things live longer than
easy things. That's a fenomen, that has explanations. Employees prefer easy
jobs, businesses prefer hype. Hype requires confusion, controversy. So it's
the opposite. Employees want to get more money for the job, businesses want
to pay less.

Pricing increases once things become more difficult, but I am asking to
simplify something. From that position I am asking for bad things.

At the same time, I am asking to help most people do their job more easily,
to solve more tasks and continue having a job. Just because that `clever`
owners will fire out all the people until war clears it out, clears all of
us (they survive, because they have money).

This is the story of how the strongest and tricky win over the clever and
smart. That's why discussions always hit the wall "why we should". You, or
language, or community, don't owe anyone anything. Times required from
languages make things simpler and at the same time make hype more complex
and difficult. One part is needed by employees, the second part must be
done for employers.

If you make things simpler - it moves tape to employees, but business
owners will select more difficult solutions and more legacy, because they
dont know `bad` and `good`, they know only hype. Simple things never create
hype. That's the mandatory point.

Btw, these explanations are very simplified and funny to declare them here.

--000000000000d1ae770610db6598--